Dores Anyone Know What This Means...
Technology1 min ago
Forget About France's Burkini Ban, Things Could Get Much Worse.
54 Answers
Answers
Round about 1,300 years ago a group of Muslims colloquially known as the Moors, resident in northern Africa. Invaded the Iberian Peninsula. It took them around eight years to conquer what is now Spain and Portugal. In doing so they managed to convert many of the Christians living in that neck of the woods to Islam and by the year 1000 about 70% of the area’s...
12:04 Sat 27th Aug 2016
Round about 1,300 years ago a group of Muslims colloquially known as the Moors, resident in northern Africa. Invaded the Iberian Peninsula. It took them around eight years to conquer what is now Spain and Portugal. In doing so they managed to convert many of the Christians living in that neck of the woods to Islam and by the year 1000 about 70% of the area’s population was Muslim.
During this time of occupation (which had similar but smaller versions taking place in Sicily and Malta) the various “Caliphates”, in true Islamic tradition, had various skirmishes amongst themselves (including a five year civil war). Although they did not make much progress beyond the Pyrenees, the occupation lasted almost 900 years before all remaining Muslims (identified under the Spanish Inquisition) were either converted back to Christianity (i.e. Catholicism), murdered or driven out.
In the 13th Century a coalition of Christian kings, fed up with the way Islamic culture and practices had been enforced upon the population began the job of driving out the Moors from Iberia. But it was not until about 1600 that the job was completed.
What has all this to do with this question? I have said before when the issue of the Islamification of Europe is raised, that politicians either do not know their history or are simply prepared to ignore it so as to secure themselves a quiet life. There is little doubt that the earlier Islamic invasion of Europe would have spread further but for the mountains and the dogged resistance of the “Franks”. I have often spoken of the “invasion” of Europe that is currently under way via northern Africa and Turkey. I have been told no such invasion is under way because the invaders are not formed as an army and/or are not arriving in tanks. To those deniers I would say have a look at the history of southern Europe from around 700 to around 1600. Try to learn from that because there is no doubt in my mind that unless drastic action is taken to prevent it, the Islamification of most of Europe will be complete within half a century.
If you want to protect the rights of invaders to “worship” as they think fit, bear in mind that you must also protect their right to do everything else that goes along with their religion. It took our Iberian neighbours the thick end of 900 years to rid their countries of what they saw as a pernicious influence on their culture and way of life. Mr Wilders probably did ‘O’ Level history at school and that’s why he taken the stance that he has.
During this time of occupation (which had similar but smaller versions taking place in Sicily and Malta) the various “Caliphates”, in true Islamic tradition, had various skirmishes amongst themselves (including a five year civil war). Although they did not make much progress beyond the Pyrenees, the occupation lasted almost 900 years before all remaining Muslims (identified under the Spanish Inquisition) were either converted back to Christianity (i.e. Catholicism), murdered or driven out.
In the 13th Century a coalition of Christian kings, fed up with the way Islamic culture and practices had been enforced upon the population began the job of driving out the Moors from Iberia. But it was not until about 1600 that the job was completed.
What has all this to do with this question? I have said before when the issue of the Islamification of Europe is raised, that politicians either do not know their history or are simply prepared to ignore it so as to secure themselves a quiet life. There is little doubt that the earlier Islamic invasion of Europe would have spread further but for the mountains and the dogged resistance of the “Franks”. I have often spoken of the “invasion” of Europe that is currently under way via northern Africa and Turkey. I have been told no such invasion is under way because the invaders are not formed as an army and/or are not arriving in tanks. To those deniers I would say have a look at the history of southern Europe from around 700 to around 1600. Try to learn from that because there is no doubt in my mind that unless drastic action is taken to prevent it, the Islamification of most of Europe will be complete within half a century.
If you want to protect the rights of invaders to “worship” as they think fit, bear in mind that you must also protect their right to do everything else that goes along with their religion. It took our Iberian neighbours the thick end of 900 years to rid their countries of what they saw as a pernicious influence on their culture and way of life. Mr Wilders probably did ‘O’ Level history at school and that’s why he taken the stance that he has.
-- answer removed --
Well at least the Dutch will now know how to deal with any anti Turkish protests
https:/
https:/
Disagree totally with banning the Koran; I think it should be compulsory reading for everybody who thinks Islam is Christianity with a crescent rather than a cross. First nine chapters should be enough. Or for those with heavy work of family commitments, then just chapter 9.
Good to be reminded by NJ of the Iberian conquests. My odd sobriquet is a garbled and ungrammatical quotation from Le Cid: "O vieillesse ennemie!". No, I haven'r read Corneille - the quote was the title of a bit of reportage in Le Monde on the foundering of Erika.
The sacred duty of the Caliph to wage war on and enslave the unbeliever was continued in the East by the Ottomans of course (Siege of Vienna 1683?).
Good to be reminded by NJ of the Iberian conquests. My odd sobriquet is a garbled and ungrammatical quotation from Le Cid: "O vieillesse ennemie!". No, I haven'r read Corneille - the quote was the title of a bit of reportage in Le Monde on the foundering of Erika.
The sacred duty of the Caliph to wage war on and enslave the unbeliever was continued in the East by the Ottomans of course (Siege of Vienna 1683?).
The time is coming close when we are all going to be faced with deciding what we believe is right for our country - and standing up for our opinions. 'Fence-sitting' is not going to be an option.
This applies to all sides of the argument. Point is that there is going to be trouble with a capital 'TROUB..' (That speaks better than it writes!)
This applies to all sides of the argument. Point is that there is going to be trouble with a capital 'TROUB..' (That speaks better than it writes!)
// Personally, I don't think that raising objections to another culture's dress choices on the grounds of perceived 'oppression' and then oppressing that culture by forcing it to abandon its dress choice is the action of a civilised society. // Nothing to do with perceived 'oppression' surely more relevant from a safety point of view. I want to see the faces of people walking our streets not masked individuals who could be carrying concealed weapons.
whiskeyron - //Nothing to do with perceived 'oppression' surely more relevant from a safety point of view. I want to see the faces of people walking our streets not masked individuals who could be carrying concealed weapons. //
I am not at all sure that people who carry weapons feel the need to conceal their faces, or that people who conceal their faces carry weapons.
There is no logic to that argument whatsoever.
I am not at all sure that people who carry weapons feel the need to conceal their faces, or that people who conceal their faces carry weapons.
There is no logic to that argument whatsoever.
whiskeyron - //Then why do motor cycle safety helmets have to be removed when entering banks & building societies ? //
One should avoid stereotyping whenever possible, but if I was going to rob a bank or building society, I would park my large motorbike on the road, and conceal my identity behind a full-face crash helmet - I would be unlikely to disguise myself as a diminutive Asian lady with a face covering.
As I say, not all huge burly men in leathers and helmets are potential robbers, and not all short Asian ladies with face-coverings are necessary peaceful innocent citizens, but the law of simple stereotyping can, and does apply.
One should avoid stereotyping whenever possible, but if I was going to rob a bank or building society, I would park my large motorbike on the road, and conceal my identity behind a full-face crash helmet - I would be unlikely to disguise myself as a diminutive Asian lady with a face covering.
As I say, not all huge burly men in leathers and helmets are potential robbers, and not all short Asian ladies with face-coverings are necessary peaceful innocent citizens, but the law of simple stereotyping can, and does apply.
Talbot - //Personally, I don't think that raising objections to another culture's dress choices on the grounds of perceived 'oppression'
Perceived? //
Yes - perceived.
It is a simple leap to assume as a western person, that Muslim women wear face covering because they are made to do so by controlling husbands, but since I have not actual experience of Muslim culture, it is not an assumption I am personally willing to make.
Perceived? //
Yes - perceived.
It is a simple leap to assume as a western person, that Muslim women wear face covering because they are made to do so by controlling husbands, but since I have not actual experience of Muslim culture, it is not an assumption I am personally willing to make.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.